I have purchased the various CoH boardgames over the last few years, plus extra maps, Zun Tsu and the PC game.

They mostly languished on the shelf due to the SLIGHTLY different rules sets from ATB1 to SOS then on to the PC. It just niggled me that I had to remember similar but different rules sets.

I pulled my self together recently and snapped out of it. With ATB2 on the way, I put in the effort to get to grips with it. Purchased ATB 2 and really enjoy it.

I also went back to try the PC game. Previously, I hadn't liked the 3D figures or terrain. I had wished for a 2D version, faithful to the boardgame. Holy cow - new boardgame maps were available!

So over the last few weeks I have been enjoying CoH as a face to face boardgame with friends, solo, via Zun Tsu and via the PC game solo and with new friends. It is a great system with strong support both on these boards and on BGG.

BUT, I read quite a few complaints about the PC game not working properly and in particular not working as per the boardgame. It got me wondering where the market is for the PC game. How many people play only PC, only board or both? Would the market for the PC game increase or decrease if it was a straight copy of the boardgame, in 2d, but with AI?

I don't actually want the funky graphics for SOS. I'd prefer boardgame maps with chits and exact boardgame rules. One major caveat is the OPTION for persistent APs. Now that seems a choice worth keeping in. As an option.

From reading the boards, I don't think I'm alone in that view, but I wonder wether I am in a majority or a minority.

Bottom line - could Matrix make more money by offering a game much more like the boardgame, or is there a bigger market for the 3D variety?

I'm of an opinion than when adapting anything from one medium to another, the source medium/material should always be adhered to as much as possible. After all, you're just preserving what made that property popular originally so how can that be bad? Sure some compromises and changes might have to be made to transition to a different medium but as much as possible, the conversion should be kept faithful. Two examples I usually point to is the LotR movies and The Shining by Kubrick. Both bear similarities to their source material, enough to capture their essence but yet are not exact copies. Both were successful. This would be similar to keeping most of the board game but adding something like Persistent APs as an option.

As a life-long comic book fan, I can tell you splitting the fan base of something is never a good idea. Considering board game fans of CoH would be coming to the PC game from that bias but that new fans whose only exposure would be the PC game would have no bias, I think regardless of Uwe encouraging the departure they did, I would have stuck to the board game rules as much as possible. And yes, as Eric has mentioned many times, Uwe had a lot of input into the PC game and wanting to make it different from the board game.

I've had friends I've introduced to CoH through the board game first and others I've introduced through the PC game first. In my experience the board game first crowd whom have subsequently picked-up the PC game have bee more critical of it, than those whom have gone in the reverse. Also those PC Game first players universally prefer the Classic AP mode once they've played the board game whereas no board game players who've tried Persistent APs have switched to that mode.

I'm hoping the SoS game and the DLC for AtB will complete the transformation of the PC game to be able to play the board game in its entirety. We're pretty close minus a few things including LOS, Elevation, etc. However when you look at how far we've come in the last few months and how much of this was done on WCS's dime and Eric's time, I for one am very grateful.

I plan on continuing to support both CoH product lines (PC and board game) as much as I can.

I'm hoping the SoS game and the DLC for AtB will complete the transformation of the PC game to be able to play the board game in its entirety. We're pretty close minus a few things including LOS, Elevation, etc. However when you look at how far we've come in the last few months and how much of this was done on WCS's dime and Eric's time, I for one am very grateful.

I plan on continuing to support both CoH product lines (PC and board game) as much as I can.

Amen to all of that.

Does anyone out there prefer and use the 3D style terrain and units? Would be good to get a balanced view.

board maps, chits, persistent Ap's.....more city fights and whatever makes it easier for modders to churn out board style map battles..as for the rules, i'll leave those opinions to the people with more experience with the board game. i also thank the people for post release improvements, it is very difficult to please everyone. I will be buying SOS.

_____________________________

Enjoy when you can, and endure when you must. ~Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

*I'm in the Wargamer middle ground* I don't buy all the wargames I want, I just buy more than I need.

I prefer the boardgame maps with the chits. I think a lot of the development time and costs come from designing and adding in the 3d elements. Not sure about the giant boards, but the regular boardgame maps use less memory I think. I think the 3d maps look good but 3d units in this game and others such as Combat Mission never quite measure up.

IMHO when converting a boardgame to computer, a design should always take advantage of what a computer can do to make a better game. If something can be improved or expanded upon, then why not? Someday ASL will make the transition to computer and changes I'm sure will be made,...and that fan base will scream bloody murder

But I'm happy to see that Eric has put in the effort to please both camps. WCS will continue to receive my orders as I really like the system for tactical and the game rocks.

I think a lot of the development time and costs come from designing and adding in the 3d elements.

WCS will continue to receive my orders as I really like the system for tactical and the game rocks.

I am with you on all of that. I just wonder if the games companies could put in less resource and make more money, whilst keeping the MAJORITY of players even happier, by directly mimicing the boardgame.

I posted this here and on BGG and so far (it's early days) all responses favour boardgame maps with chits. It's as though we have been given a temperamental Ferrari when what we really wanted was a sure and steady Ford. Unless there is a non-vocal majority.

I just played a PC on-line match. The FF was tense, we both had a great time, but we used boardgame maps and chits. Oh - and the chat interface was truly shocking. And I mean so shocking that we had a LONG discussion about using Zun Tsu rather than the PC game.

I do not play the board game at all but I do enjoy the looks of the 2d boards that have been made. I think that to go with 2d only map boards would eliminate alot of potential from the game. Just following some of the processes that went into the Stalingrad 2d map seemed to put it out of the grasp of many potential scenario designers out there. If it was that much of a challenge to produce the Stalingrad map from a scan of an existing board, then I do not see it being easy to turn out quality maps. The artwork would be beyond most of us, and we would be limited to scans of generic map boards as was done or would all have to wait for people with the skills required to produce maps for us all. I like being able to take a screenshot from google earth and produce a 3d map that my son and I are able to play a game on. I think that the 3d map making part of the game could use a little work to make it a bit more user friendly but I can still get good results from it as it stands. All you have to do is look at the scenarios section here and see that several players have created and updated scenarios with the 3d maps but how many have been done with the 2d maps? I would go fo a complete set of 2d map tiles that could be used to create custom maps. I would still like to be bable to use the google earth screens as a template though.